The art of investigation
In a new feature series for The Walkley Magazine, I talk to leading journalists about key skills of the craft. First up: investigative reporting.
The “Art of Journalism” series aims to uncover what it takes to be a great journalist in the 21st century. Each segment narrows in on a particular form of journalism — investigation, critique, interviewing, podcasting, column writing and crime reporting — and draws on established journalists to examine the skills, techniques and processes behind creating their best stories.
For the “Art of Investigation” segment, I talk to two investigative journalists — Suzanne Smith and Nance Haxton — to understand more about the methodology of planning and executing an investigation, what practical skills are most useful in their work, and how journalists can harness changes in the media landscape to their advantage.
Suzanne Smith
Suzanne Smith is a six-time Walkley Award-winning investigative journalist. She’s held roles as editor of ABC’s Investigation Unit, executive producer at Background Briefing and as a senior journalist at Foreign Correspondent. She now works at Crikey’s Inquiry Journalism unit INQ as consulting editor.
What are the qualities of a good investigative journalist?
Tenacious, dogged… like a dog with a bone. You need to be prepared to make one hundred calls. The best investigative journalists understand the value of contacts and trust. The biggest stories that I’ve ever had have been from whistleblowers who trust me. You need to look after your sources, and when you make a promise to them, keep it.
When beginning to investigate a story, where do you begin? What does the process of investigation look like?
Firstly, you’d take the research brief, and work out what open or public sources already exist and what can be accessed from the internet. Then you start sourcing out your key contacts. If we were doing an investigation on opioid use, for example, we’d start by talking to the big academics who have done all the existing research work.
The process requires a lot of phone work, and collating what data already exists. You may go to PBS (the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme) or to the Department of Health, and talk to them about what data exists with them. After that you start to form a picture… and then you do the deep dive.
You can look to former employees who have left the companies at focus. LinkedIn is a really good source to use, because often their CVs are up there. Then you can search social media, and Facebook profiles to see who their colleagues may be.
If we’re investigating a certain individual, we’ll go to the courts. I spend a lot of time going through court files, which you can apply to, if you’re a journalist and it’s in the issue of natural justice.
What practical skills or tools have been most crucial in your career?
Understanding Freedom of Information is important. I’ve done many FOI’s and a lot of them have failed but it’s been a good process to learn.
Writing is also an important skill. There’s so much media and stories circulating, so your writing has to cut through. It’s about engaging your audience, and getting them to read your story.
Some of the best investigative journalists are the ones that have come up through newsrooms. There you get that really solid training of working to deadlines and verifying facts. Good investigative journalists are the ones that have spent time in Canberra, in Parliament, in Western Australia, for example, because you get to understand the political processes.
Because of the lack of transparency, and how difficult it is to get data these days, it’s really important to know how the government works, how policy works, how lobbying works, how big corporations work. There’s so much value in learning how these arcane processes work behind the scenes.
How has the practice of investigative journalism changed over the course of your career?
It’s changed a lot with organisations like Bellingcat, which is gathering open source information and posts from people’s media platforms. It’s really important for journalists to know how to access that. Some of the greatest stories from Background Briefing, where I used to be the executive producer, were from simply searching Facebook sites, finding far right-wing groups, and breaking stories that way.
How does the process of investigation differ between mediums?
Each platform has its benefits. TV has the greatest impact, as it really affects people emotionally, but it doesn’t have that global reach. A beautifully written investigative piece can go viral, and very quickly. Podcasting is on the rise, and is very intimate. It’s a good way to engage with some people who don’t want to be on TV. You can get very powerful stories on podcasting. Being multi-platform is very important for young journalists.
Nance Haxton
Nance Haxton is an investigative journalist, Griffith University lecturer, and podcaster at The Wandering Journo. She has won Walkley awards for her investigations into the Woomera Detention Centre riots, and series of stories titled “Justice system fails disabled victims of sexual abuse”.
How do you decide what tip-offs or stories to pursue further?
I have a list of stories that I always keep an eye on, alongside doing the daily rounds.
Sometimes stories develop over time, like my investigation into the deaths of boxers in Queensland. I had never really had an interest in boxing — investigations don’t only need to be on topics you know a lot about. I had noticed there were two deaths within the space of a few years and decided to dig a little deeper.
Sometimes the stories that you’d expect to be massive, turn out to be nothing. Then there are the stories that had been creeping along slowly for a year, before suddenly reaching a crescendo.
When I was working on the disability story in South Australia, I remember writing out a list of 15 people that I could ring, but that was more covering myself for future ABC World Today stories. You get to the end of the year, and you’ve got this really comprehensive picture forming of an issue that no one else has covered yet, and it’s up to you to then put everything together.
So much of investigative journalism lies in that grey area. It’s taking what everyone is talking about, and pulling it all together.
How has the practice of investigative journalism changed over your career?
I find it quite ironic, because I did my masters on “The Death of Investigative Journalism” at QUT (published in 2001). At that time, it was looking pretty grim.
While newsrooms have been slashed recently, and numbers of journalists have dwindled, technology has enabled journalists to do so much more. All the changes in technology have become such an integral part of our process now. Because of this, investigative journalists need to be able to work across a variety of different mediums. It takes both online and offline work now.
The media raids are most worrying for both everyday journalists, and investigative journalists, because it shows we are being watched. In my podcast The Journo Project, I interview Mark Willacy who mentioned how he’ll still meet a contact every week, and make sure he doesn’t have his phone with him; he leaves it in his office.
There’s this dual highway going on that despite having all this new technology, journalists may have to opt out of that, and go back to more old school tactics.
What does the future of investigative journalism look like?
There’s no doubt that we’re in a big age of digital disruption. I do have faith that we need a Fourth Estate, and there will always be a need for investigative journalism, we need just need to find that effective model.
I think there is more of a demand for longform. This is the irony of the digital age — people are going to clickbait, but then they’re also going to hour-long serial podcasts.
